Vehicle | Precise engine size | Difference from world average | Engine size to consumption ratio | Horsepower from 1 L | Engine size to 100 kg of weight |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
2.0 i |
2 L (1998 cc) |
14.8% smaller | - | 58 hp from 1 L | 154 cc to 100 kg |
2.0 |
2 L (1998 cc) |
14.8% smaller | - | 74 hp from 1 L | 154 cc to 100 kg |
2.0 i 16V |
2 L (1998 cc) |
14.8% smaller | - | 66 hp from 1 L | 154 cc to 100 kg |
2.5 i |
2.49 L (2492 cc) |
6.2% bigger | - | 65 hp from 1 L | 178 cc to 100 kg |
Vehicle | 2.0 i |
---|---|
Precise engine size | 2 L (1998 cc) |
Difference from world average | 14.8 smaller |
Engine size to consumption ratio | - |
Horsepower from 1 L | 58 hp from 1 L |
Engine size to 100 kg of weight | 154 cc to 100 kg |
Vehicle | 2.0 |
Precise engine size | 2 L (1998 cc) |
Difference from world average | 14.8 smaller |
Engine size to consumption ratio | - |
Horsepower from 1 L | 74 hp from 1 L |
Engine size to 100 kg of weight | 154 cc to 100 kg |
Vehicle | 2.0 i 16V |
Precise engine size | 2 L (1998 cc) |
Difference from world average | 14.8 smaller |
Engine size to consumption ratio | - |
Horsepower from 1 L | 66 hp from 1 L |
Engine size to 100 kg of weight | 154 cc to 100 kg |
Vehicle | 2.5 i |
Precise engine size | 2.49 L (2492 cc) |
Difference from world average | 6.2 bigger |
Engine size to consumption ratio | - |
Horsepower from 1 L | 65 hp from 1 L |
Engine size to 100 kg of weight | 178 cc to 100 kg |